NHT M^ Evolutions

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by JoeyT, Sep 23, 2002.

  1. JoeyT

    JoeyT Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2002
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    After living with my M6 along side my 2.9s for a couple of weeks, I can tell you this speaker is up to the job. I have since heard the M5 and def. like the way the M6 voices much better. I know they are supposed to sound the same but they DONT. There is as much dif. as the 2.5 and the 3.3 minus the bass.
    Hopefully these speakers getting to some credible listeners hands like these will lead to greater interest.
    http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/hot...eID=157&page=2
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Charles Gurganus

    Charles Gurganus Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 1999
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joey, did you get just the M6 or did you also get the bass module as well?
     
  3. JoeyT

    JoeyT Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2002
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Charles,

    Just the M6. I am using a very low Q sealed tempest in a 220 +litre enclosure. It is more than competent and musical at the very low end.

    I really like this speaker better than my old AC2 and maybe better than the top half of my 2.9s.

    Cheers!
     
  4. Charles Gurganus

    Charles Gurganus Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 1999
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    0
    The new NHT's have gotten several excellent reviews in the magazines. I was worried about where NHT was going after they discountinued their whole lineup over the last couple of years. The flexibility of their new lineup has put those worries to bed.
     
  5. Haru

    Haru Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    0
    to be honest, I find that once the listener adjusts his ear height to match, the 2.9 sounds about the same as the 3.3 (except for the bass extension and output). If course you might say that I am deaf or that I don't know anything, but there it is.

    I understand that for the 3.3, drivers have to be matched within 0.1db of a reference, and NHT had ended up with a large stock of parts that were well within NHT's normal tolerances, but outside of the tolerances specified for the 3.3. These "rejected" parts had already been figured into the cost of the 3.3, upto a point, meaning that NHT could offer a speaker made with them for a substantial cost savings over the 3.3.

    Technically, if you use the drivers that passed the 0.1db tolerance for a 2.9, and you get your ear level correct for the cabinet size, it should sound IDENTICAL above 100Hz to the 3.3, except for the floor reflections that would occur fractionally sooner. However, the fact is that NHT's regular tolerances are tight enough that even the "rejected" drivers are mostly within the perception window of the human ear, and with careful set up, a 2.9 can be made to sound very much like a 3.3.

    At least that has been my expereince. YMMV.
     
  6. JoeyT

    JoeyT Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2002
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not sure if you were replying to my post on dif. sounds.I agree that 2.9s can be set up to sound like 3.3s.
    However, I was referring to the dif. of 2.5s and 2.9s/3.3s.

    Anyone else bought these awesome monitors yet?
     

Share This Page